CHANDIGARH: The case of a missing youth, who was engaged by the call police to drive them to Bihar, “became even murkier with the Bihar “police contradicting the version of the “Chandigarh police before the Punjab and Haryana High Court Dec. 12th,

Mr. Neeraj Sinha, Superintendent of Police, Nalanda, informed Mr. Justice Swatanter Kumar that there was no truth in the version of the local Police regarding their detention by the Nalanda police.

According to admitted facts of the case, the local police had engaged a taxi from Ambala, driven by Harjinder Singh, alias Bittu on Dec.3, 1994, to “investigate a case in Garrhi Tehsil of Walanda district in Bihar. The police team headed by SI Sukhdey Singh was accompanied by Surinder Kumar, “one of the accused in a fraud case. On reaching the place an “encounter” ensued resulting in the death of Sushil Kumar.

“Mr. Randeep Singh Rai, counsel for ‘the Chandigarh police, maintained that encounter had taken place no bullet was fired from the weapons of the Chandigarh police personnel. The SP ‘Nalanda informed that the three persons were named in the killing of ‘Sushil Kumar besides five unidentified accused. According to him, Surinder Kumar was the main accused and) he had fired at the deceased.

The judge was amazed to know that a person in the custody of the Chandigarh police, who was on the prowl of Sushil Kumar, also carried a weapon on his person.

The petitioner Mr, Prem Singh, father of Bittu, had filed a habeas Corus petition alleging that his son was done to death by the Chandigarh police party as he was the only eyewitness t0 the reported “encounter” resulting in the death of Sushil Kumar.

Mr, Neeraj Sinha, SP, disclosed that out of three identified assassins, Satish Prasad was absconding while the antecedents of Balwant Singh could not be verified. Surinder Kumar was at present on bail granted by the court. Partial charge sheet had been filed in the case against the main accused, he added.

Appearing on behalf of the Haryana Police, Mr. A.R. Takhar and Ms. Sangeeta Rai, contended that all efforts were made to trace the missing youth but to no avail. It was alleged that the Bihar police did not cooperate ‘with the Haryana police in tracing the driver. Mr, Surender Verma, the owner of the taxi engaged by the Chandigarh police, maintained that Bittu had rang upon Dec. 7, 1994, to say that he was returning to Ambala as the vehicle had been involved in a case, Mr. Vermalater went to Bihar and brought back his vehicle. But the driver never returned to Ambala.

Intriguingly, the Nalanda SP could not explain why the vehicle, in which Surinder Kumar the alleged killer of Sushil Kumar had reached the state from Chandigarh, had not been impounded.

Finding gaping holes in the “whole involving police from three territories, Mr. Justice Swatanter Kuimar detected the SP Nalanda to file ‘written statement answering the following questions

Whether Haryana Police of the Chandigarh police approached them for tracing Bittus ‘Whether Sushil was killed in an encounter or murdered; Who were the Persons found to be present at the Scene of the incident; Why was not the vehicle impounded? The matter would come up for further scrutiny this week.

Article extracted from this publication >> December 15, 1995